Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > Ethnographic Weapons
FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 22nd August 2006, 02:03 PM   #26
BSMStar
Member
 
BSMStar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Kansas City, MO USA
Posts: 312
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rivkin
aircrafts were usually made from wood, dural or other similarly non bulletproof materials. light armored vehicles (APC) usually have 5mm or so of armour. Sword is like 25mm wide - it is a completely different class, more like a tank.

The quote from the link, talks about the development of the 50 cal from Browning (around WWI) to WWII where it was used for anti-aircraft (due to its reach) and anti-armor (due to its penetration). Of course as new weapons are introduced, new armor is developed. If I recall, the Britt’s started using their 88s against developing German armor since nothing else seemed to penetrate it. Today, you tend to "melt" your way through the "new" armor, and so it goes... back to the armor chalk board.

Cutting seven of these 50s in half with a sword, what can I say... I am easy to impress (it made a nice tank).

But the real question... since not all "tanks" are equal, (and are you suggesting this is true) do all swords have the same "strength" to stand up and split 7 rounds of 50?
BSMStar is offline   Reply With Quote
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:37 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.